Being useful v making money

There was a post on the Clients from Hell website about an abstract artist with very vague ideas about what she was wanting for a logo. 

I commented:

Actually, I think I would tell an abstract artist that she doesn't need a logo.
If she wants something visual to put on business cards, put one of her images on one side (full size), and perhaps use her signature that she signs paintings with as a wordmark.

And someone replied:

Wrong.
If the customer wants a logo, I'm not going to suddenly diminish the job's potential profitability by saying something this stupid. I can't charge the same amount for using her image/signature as I can for a logo (which is the core of my business).
And freelancers like you probably wonder why they can't make a living at design... LOL

Unfortunately comments are now closed, which is so frustrating when you want to reply. But here's my thoughts:

Of course, to a certain extent you give a client what they want. And of course you want to make money. But to the extent of taking large amounts of their hard-earned cash for something they don't need at all, that will do them no good - perhaps even harm? Sure, people want snake oil. Should we view this as a great business opportunity?

Call me an idealist. But if the only way you can make a living from design is to throw integrity out the window, chuck it (design, not integrity) and go and do something useful.


Note: If she really insisted she wanted a logo I might do my best for her - knowing she'd go elsewhere anyway if I didn't. But my first job would be to try to convince her she didn't.